private parties from suing state governments on the
basis of federal laws, were narrowly in the minority
when the Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 inEEOC v.
Wyoming(1983) that the federal law constitutionally
trumped a Wyoming state law mandating retirement
at the age of fifty-five for a Game and Fish Depart-
ment supervisor. InJohnson v. Mayor & City Council of
Baltimore(1985), however, the Court unanimously
held that the mere fact that federal firefighters were
required to retire at age fifty-five did not establish
being younger than fifty-five to be a BFOQ for all
state and local firefighters. In other words, the Court
left it to state and local governments to provide evi-
dence supporting their claim that age is a relevant
factor for firefighters in the performance of their
duties.
Although the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA)continued to require pilots and co-pilots to re-
tire at age sixty, inWestern Air Lines v. Criswell(1985),
the Supreme Court unanimously disallowed invol-
untary retirement of flight engineers (those who
monitor the cockpit’s side-facing instrument panel)
at age sixty, because the company refused to provide
specific medical evidence of unfitness. Trans World
Airlines (TWA), meanwhile, gave younger pilots and
co-pilots medical fitness exams and reassigned those
who flunked as flight engineers. InTWA v. Thur-
ston(1985), the Court unanimously ruled that TWA
could not require those who passed their fitness ex-
ams, upon reaching sixty, to await reassignment as
flight engineers on the basis of the seniority of their
application.
During the 1980’s, corporate and university
downsizing seemed imperative, as personnel costs
mounted even as shareholders demanded higher
and higher profits. Accordingly, employers offered
“golden handshake” plans with early-retirement in-
centives. As a condition of such plans, employees
were asked to waive various rights, including the
right to sue in the event that the incentives benefited
some employees more than others. These plans con-
tinued through the end of the decade, but in 1990,
Congress passed the Older Workers Benefit Protec-
tion Act. The act provided procedural protections,
including ample time to consider an early-retirement
plan and an interval of time to cancel a decision to
accept a plan.
Impact Age discrimination became the most fre-
quent type of discrimination complaint handled by
the EEOC and the courts in the 1980’s. Successful
litigants won lucrative settlements, and businesses
were forced to alter their practices if they wanted to
avoid lawsuits of their own. The age-discrimination
laws applied primarily or solely to employment dis-
crimination, however. Age discrimination in public
accommodations (such as buses, shopping malls,
and theaters) and public facilities (such as govern-
ment offices and public parks) was not prohibited.
Still, the high profile of age-discrimination litiga-
tion combined with statutory expansions to give
the issue of elderly rights a prominent place in the
public consciousness. The 1980’s was thus a crucial
decade in the acceptance and expansion of those
rights.Further Reading
Eglit, Howard. “Health Care Allocation for the El-
derly: Age Discrimination by Another Name?”
Houston Law Review26 (October, 1989): 813-900.
A discussion of the practice of providing trans-
planted organs to younger rather than older per-
sons.
Issacharoff, Samuel, and Erica Worth Harris. “Is Age
Discrimination Really Age Discrimination? The
ADEA’s Unnatural Solution.”New York University
Law Review72 (October, 1997): 780-840. Argues
that the American Association of Retired Persons
perverted the ADEA by securing amendments en-
abling rich executives to obtain lucrative awards
by suing employers after being forced to retire
because of their high salaries.
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Age Discrimination. Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1998. A comprehensive review of
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, as
amended.
Whitton, Linda S. “Ageism: Paternalism and Preju-
dice.”DePaul Law Review46 (Winter, 1997): 453-- Reviews social and psychological bases for
Age discrimination
Michael HaasSee also Affirmative action; Mandatory retirement;
Supreme Court decisions.32 Age discrimination The Eighties in America